> That still doesn't give any context that would support the action.
That's because if the true context in support was given, it would be: "because seed sharing reduces our rate of sales, and our resulting profits".
That's because if the true context in support was given, it would be: "because seed sharing reduces our rate of sales, and our resulting profits".
If seed counterfeiting is "a big problem", then banning seed sharing is "an even bigger, worse problem". What context justifies causing a bigger, worse problem to address a smaller problem?
Occam's razor suggests that the primary motivation was protecting corporate profits anyways, not addressing seed counterfeiting.